Edith Cowan University
Research Online
ECU Publications Post 2013
2015
The ‘integration of theory and practice’ as a central
focus for senior schooling Physical Education
Studies
Andrew Jones
Edith Cowan University, [email protected]
This paper was originally published as Jones, A., & Penney, D. (2015). The ‘integration of theory and practice’ as a central focus for senior schooling
Physical Education Studies. In Values into Action - A Brighter Future: Edited Proceedings of the 29th ACHPER International Conference, (pp. 12-22).
Adelaide, April 13-15, 2015.
This Conference Proceeding is posted at Research Online.
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworkspost2013/2352
Edith Cowan University Copyright Warning You may print or download ONE copy of this document for the purpose of your own research or study. The University does not authorize you to copy, communicate or otherwise make available electronically to any other person any copyright material contained on this site. You are reminded of the following:  Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright.  A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may be a copyright infringement. Where the reproduction of such material is done without attribution of authorship, with false attribution of authorship or the authorship is treated in a derogatory manner, this may be a breach of the author’s moral rights contained in Part IX of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).  Courts have the power to impose a wide range of civil and criminal sanctions for infringement of copyright, infringement of moral rights and other offences under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Higher penalties may apply, and higher damages may be awarded, for offences and infringements involving the conversion of material into digital or electronic form.
The “integration of theory and practice” as a central focus for senior schooling Physical
Education
Andrew Jones & Professor Dawn Penney
Edith Cowan University, Perth & Monash University, Melbourne
In February 2007 a new senior secondary Physical Education Studies (PES) was introduced
in Western Australia (WA). The course was one of approximately 50 new courses that were
developed in conjunction with the introduction of new Western Australian Certificate of
Education (WACE). Notably, the rationale for PES claims that the “integration of theory and
practice is central to studies in this course” (Curriculum Council of WA, 2009, Physical
Education Course Syllabus, p. 2). This paper draws on findings from an ongoing PhD study
to examine the notion of integrated theory and practice in the context of senior schooling. It
will acknowledge that pedagogy is not a discrete entity, and is influenced by a range of
different factors, not least in senior schooling, examinations. The paper initially draws on
literature addressing pedagogical practice in physical education (PE) in senior schooling, as
a backdrop to the case for “the integration of theory and practice" (in the context of PES in
WA) and briefly reports on how this was progressed in the initial course design and then
subsequently during implementation. Attention then focuses on a series of case studies which
reflect the ultimate aim of the study, that of identifying legitimate and original practice in the
field of senior school PES, and specifically integrated theory – prac pedagogy. The paper
discusses different ways in which integration has been interpreted and enacted in the case
study schools and the factors influencing the various approaches and responses identified.
This paper extends insights into the various discourses impacting integration and highlights
the need for more work that engages with the complexities of how curriculum and assessment
discourses can be effectively mediated through pedagogical practice.
Introduction
In February 2007 a new senior secondary Physical Education Studies (PES) course was
introduced in Western Australia (WA). The course was one of approximately 50 new courses
developed in conjunction with the introduction of new Western Australian Certificate of
Education (WACE). The changes arose from a review of post-compulsory schooling (later to
be renamed Senior Schooling) which identified the need for greater alignment between senior
secondary education and Kindergarten to Year 10 curriculum; a broadening of the range of
tertiary entrance options and subjects available to students; and a rationalisation of course
structures, assessment systems and subject selection criteria in senior secondary education
(Curriculum Council of WA, 2002; see also Penney & Walker, 2007). For the first time in
WA, achievements in PES would be recognised for tertiary entrance. As discussed elsewhere
(Penney & Hay, 2008; Penney, Jones, Newhouse & Campbell, 2012), this presented
challenges and opportunities for the new course development, including how to address a
12
recurring issue in physical education (PE) internationally, of how to effectively integrate
theoretical and practical dimensions of learning and legitimise “multiple ways of knowing”
(Brown & Penney, 2013) in senior secondary and/or examination coursesi.
This paper draws on findings from a doctoral research study that is investigating this issue
amidst ongoing curriculum change and reform, specifically in the context of the initial years
of implementation of the new PES course in WA. Following MacPhail (2004), Bernstein’s
(1990) model of the social construction of pedagogic discourse has been used as a framework
to locate and position teachers in relation to other stakeholders in the design process and
implementation phase. The study comprises three phases that have addressed different sites
of influence upon teachers’ thinking about prospective integration of theory and prac in the
new PES, and explored how integration is being developed in practice. Previous presentations
(Jones & Penney, 2013) and work in progress has directed attention to issues and influences
surrounding the development of the PES official course text. This paper pursues the case
study phase of data collection, where the focus has been on teachers’ interpretations and
enactment of the new PES course.
The paper necessarily begins by providing some essential background to the research,
specifically in regard to the new PES course and the theoretical frame for the study. We
discuss selected literature in PE associated with senior schooling as a backdrop to a
presenting a definition of integrated theory and practice. Details of the methodology and data
gathering methods employed are provided, before drawing on data from a series of case
studies, to discuss the different ways in which 'integration' has been interpreted and enacted
in schools and the factors influencing the various approaches and responses
identified. Finally, discussion returns to further explore the various discourses impacting
integration and highlights the need for more work that engages with the complexities of how
curriculum and assessment discourses can be effectively mediated through pedagogical
practice.
Background and development of the new PES course in WA
Published in 2002, the document “Our Youth Our Future. Post-Compulsory Education
Review” (Curriculum Council of Western Australia, 2002) provided recommendations that
became the key point of reference for the reform of senior secondary schooling in WA and
development of some 50 new courses, including PES. The process of producing the new PES
official text reaffirmed the political and contested nature of curriculum development. This
paper does not pursue the official text development but rather, is concerned with
interpretation and enactment of the new PES course.
The PES course content was outlined in relation to three content areas: (i) movement, skills,
strategies and tactics; (ii) physiological dimensions; and (iii) social dimensions. A notable
feature of the PES course in WA (particularly in relation to the interest in prospective
13
integration of theoretical and practical knowledge) is that all units of study address each of
the three content areas. The design thus sought to prompt teachers and students working at
any level to explore connections between the three content areas, with depth and complexity
increasing in more advanced units.
Assessment arrangements play a critical role in shaping teachers’ thinking about the nature
and content of the teaching and learning experiences they will develop within a senior
secondary PE context. The new PES course in WA prescribed three types of assessment to be
used in school based assessment:
1. Performance/Response: The assessment of students engaged in an
activity, on-the-spot evaluation of performance and student reflective
response about their forms and settings;
2. Investigation: Investigation of own and others’ current participation in
physical activity, participation potential, physical activity issues and social
contexts; and,
3. Response: Students apply their knowledge and skills when analysing and
responding to a series of stimuli or prompts. (Curriculum Council of
Western Australia, 2008, p.9)
The external examination comprised a written paper with a weighting of 70% and a practical
examination weighted 30% of the total mark. School based assessment marks are scaled
against the external examination score, highlighting the importance of the examination
component. The course document did not prescribe the physical activity contexts through
which course content should be taught and/or assessed for the school-based component of
assessment. Hence, from a teaching and learning perspective teachers were left to make local
decisions about the sporting and physical activity contexts that they would use to illustrate
and explore content, both practically and theoretically. The nature of the units (incorporating
multiple areas of content) and the assessment types identified above clearly established
potential for the integration of theoretical and practical dimensions of learning in PES.
Specifications developed for the practical element of the external examination in 2008 did,
however, detail 14 sports that students could select from as the context for their “performance
assessment” in the examination. This could be the same activity as that featuring in the units
studied at school, or a different activity.
This research study has addressed the following three research questions:
Q1. What were the discourses that formed the policy principles from which the PES
was designed, and why was there a particular “central” focus on the “integration of
theory and practice”?
14
Q2. What texts and “local translations” (Fullan, 1999) of the PES central focus, to
integrate theory and practice, have been made at “intermediary sites” (Hargreaves,
1986) during initial implementation?
Q3. What integrated “theory and prac” pedagogical practice has emerged from the
implementation process?
This paper reports on data pertaining specifically to questions 2 and 3.
Conceptual Framework - Bernstein’s (1990) model of the social construction of
pedagogical discourse
The questions above reflect that the study has drawn upon Bernstein’s (1990) model of the
social construction of pedagogical discourse, with the intent of extending understanding of
the discourses, processes, texts and “translations” that formed course design and
implementation, and in turn planning for teaching, learning and assessment. The findings
reported in this paper relate to actions and influences relating to the development and
enactment of the new PES course that are associated with what Bernstein (1990) termed the
Official Recontextualising Field (ORF), the Pedagogic Recontualising Field (PRF), and the
“secondary field”. In the context of PES, the recontextualising fields centre on organisations
and agencies such as the Curriculum Council of WA (now the School Curriculum and
Standards Authority (SCSA), various educational systems and sectors and the States Tertiary
Institutions. Other agencies active in these fields include ACHPER WA, commercial
textbook providers, and local Health and Physical Education (HPE). School based teachers
are considered the prime agents in the “secondary field”. Bernstein stresses that the actions,
negotiations and decisions within the recontextualising fields and between those fields and
the secondary field, are critical in gleaning a true understanding of pedagogical practice. The
emphasis is that discourses flow between fields and are changed in this process. Time and
space precludes further exploration of Bernstein’s model but the authors lent heavily on the
work of Bernstein (1990), MacPhail (2004), MacPhail and Halbert (2005), Penney (1998,
2013), Penney & Chandler, (2000), and Penney and Evans, 1999, in framing this study.
Integrated and interrelated practice in Physical Education
Past studies in senior secondary physical education (Penney & Kirk, 1998; Thorburn, 2007)
have noted that amidst curriculum changes, teachers typically felt comfortable in using
familiar pedagogy practices and/or were slow to evolve, or adapt existing pedagogies. A key
issue in this regard is the pedagogical linkage of knowledge and understanding to and in
practical settings. Macdonald and Brooker (1997), Hay and Penney (2009), Brown (2013),
Brown and Penney (2013), Thorburn (2007) and Thorburn and Collins (2003) all recognise
Arnold’s 1979 and 1985 work as continuing to be a useful reference point for “situating
physical activity as a site for learning and assessment, and promoting integrated thinking
15
about content and contexts of learning in PE” (Hay and Penney, 2009, p.393) and pedagogy
to support it. Space prevents a detailed review of Arnolds conceptualisation of “in, through
and about” movement, but we support Brown’s (2013) call for his original work to be
revisited. Importantly for this study, Arnold emphasises that there is a connection between
participation in movement (through the body) and understanding it (through rational
knowledge). In the context of this paper and the broader study, it is this connection or
integration that forms the basis for a working definition of integrated theory and practice as;
an understanding about theoretical knowledge and principles developed and utilised in and
through practical activities, contexts and situations. As such theory and practice are
interrelated and integrated. Hay and Penney (2009) similarly referred to the “interrelatedness
of knowledge, process (cognitive and motor), skills and the affective domain” (p.395). This
study has explored the ways in which this notion has been expressed in the development of
the new official curriculum text for PES in WA, and in subsequent interpretations and
enactment of the text.
Methodology
Qualitative, interpretative, naturalistic and subjective methods have been utilised in the study.
Document analysis and semi structured interviews were used to explore research questions
one and two (above). A series of school based case studies, utilising documentary and
interview data were undertaken for research question three.
The selection of case study schools emerged from preceding phases of data collection and
analysis. In particular, interviewees were asked “Where do we see legitimate and original
integrated ‘theory – prac’ pedagogical practice”? Variously, interviewees were able to offer
some teacher or school names, with notable duplication of names offered occurring. Based
on these purposeful sampling was used to approach four schools (note at the time of writing
only three of the four case studies had been completed. For the purpose of this paper they are
referred to as Schools A, B and C). In accordance with institutional ethics approval that had
been previously granted, consent for participation was gained from relevant Principals and
PES teacher(s). The sample schools represented a cross section of system and sectors (State
Government, Catholic and Anglican), and included three metro and one country WA school.
One teacher from each school was represented. Documentary data comprised unit plans,
assessments and tasks, including marking keys and/or rubrics. Semi-structured interviews
with teachers were recorded and field notes were also taken.
Data analysis has centred on the question, What integrated “theory and prac” pedagogical
practice has emerged from the implementation process? The following section reports
findings from three case study schools and focuses on the ways in which “integration of
theory and practice” (Curriculum Council of WA, 2009, Physical Education Course Syllabus,
16
p. 2), has been interpreted and enacted, and the factors influencing the various approaches
and responses identified.
What is integrated theory and practice?
All case study school teachers were asked to clarify their understanding of the phrase
“Integration of theory and practice”. Importantly the reader should understand that the PES
syllabus, while claiming that the “integration of theory and practice is central to studies in
this course” (Curriculum Council of WA, 2009, Physical Education Course Syllabus, p. 2)
does not define this phrase or provide any specific guidance to its role in course design,
assessment or teaching and learning practices in the syllabus. In interviews teachers were able
to articulate their understanding of the phrase.
School A understood the “integration of theory and practice” to be “about experiences”, and
the “consistent application and practice of content through experiences, as well as written
consolidation. Students need to experience it and then put it into practice”. School B shared
the emphasis on practical experience, activity and application but clarified that “theory is the
content of the syllabus, therefore integration of theory and practice is activity that supports
the students understanding of the content” and importantly “motivates them to learn the
syllabus content”. Similarly for School C practical application is central, adding, however,
that integration is a two way process, stating, “theory is knowledge, practice is practical
application. It’s doing and applying knowledge to doing and vice versa. It’s theory to practice
and practice to theory”. Importantly for this school understanding is not limited to syllabus
content alone. They made the point that “the theory does not have to be syllabus content……I
am interested in the kids viewing this course from a number of lenses which are content
based, but also “what do the examiners see when you perform or write something done? I
want my kids to understand the examination process as well and apply that knowledge to
their written and practical performance”.
The “Integration of theory and practice” in course design, assessment and pedagogical
practice
While there are some synergies between the above understandings of the phrase “integration
of theory and practice”, the articulation of these in teachers’ course design, assessment and
pedagogical practice, differed considerably.
The teacher from School C indicated that the integration of theory and practice was a
“fundamental feature in planning considerations” and stated, “the unit is mapped out to
include syllabus content, aligned to a practical illustration or a practical session”.
Pragmatically and to promote flexible practice, students were required to come to PES in PE
uniform even when timetabled in a classroom. “Free space” around the school, such as the
unused corner of an oval, pool stand or spare tennis court, were used on an ad-hoc basis. The
17
teacher felt that this flexible approach to location reflected and supported the integration of
theory and practice. Pedagogically, “I think I do it day in day out. I start most, but not all,
lessons with a practical based example of what I am going to focus on. It might be a few balls
spinning out in the yard or a bit of You Tube in class or quickly on my ipad. Whatever, it’s
something practical that they see or do”. The teacher was keen to point out that their
approach is firmly grounded in student’s needs but also has a pragmatic aspect in that, “it’s
not the (exam) paper itself that requires theory into practice, that’s not solely why I teach the
way I do. I am not teaching to the test, I simply think my students learn best like this. Also,
it’s like raising the dead some time, so getting them up doing something is a necessity as
well”.
Broadly, the assessment schedule at School C included aspects of the integration of
theoretical and practical components of the syllabus. For example, on two occasions practical
performance tasks act as both assessments of practical skills, and also a data gathering
exercise for a separate task. Another required students to use two performance analysis
models and, in short, collect data, analyse self and others, apply theoretical “subdisciplines”
and design an intervention applied through identified relevant coaching methods.
In School B, articulation of the phrase “integration of theory and practice” typically
manifested itself by “flip flopping between theory and practice”. This took two forms; firstly,
adhoc “flip flopping” where interrelated principles such as exercise physiology and motor
learning are linked. Secondly, through the timetabling of classes where across a week, one
theory/prac lesson per week is scheduled, alongside two “theory” lessons and one practical
performance session. In this way a conscious attempt was made to integrate theory/prac, not
necessarily in relation to content strands (e.g. Biomechanics to Exercise physiology) but in
teaching and learning approaches, such as unassessed lab activities. The assessment schedule
in School B had a heavy bias on examination style tasks for students, including
“investigations”. Typically, assessment tasks had a discrete focus. Practical stimulus and
examples of performance based data were used for most exams and investigation tasks, but
they were not related to practical movement experiences and/or to school based practical
performance sessions.
In School A, there was little evidence of planned integration of theory and practice or
theoretical content strands, either in the unit outline, pedagogical practices or assessments.
There were plenty of examples of practical or “sport” based examples used to illustrate
propositional knowledge or to act as a prompt in a task or a stem to an exam (for example;
the Olympics and Soccer World cups in different continents as contexts for a tasks on
competing in varying environmental conditions) or test style question (for example;
photographic stills of a Badminton serve as a basis for a question on segmental interaction).
Practical performance sessions in Volleyball were used on an ad hoc basis to illustrate
“theory” covered elsewhere, but this was not embedded in the unit outline. Practical
18
performance tasks were typically skills based, reflecting the tasks within the practical
examination. Typically, “response style” or examination focused questions featured in
written assessment. For “investigations” students were given questions to research, before
answering short and long answer questions in class.
Factors influencing the approaches and responses identified.
This section provides a synopsis of some factors influencing the approaches to the delivery of
PES in WA, and more specifically the integration of theory and practice in the case study
schools. The influence of time considerations, the syllabus design, content and requirements,
and the external Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR) examination for PES are
discussed. This is not an exhaustive list of influences and reflects limitations of space. The
influence of other factors including professional development, text books, sample exams,
support materials and individual school imperatives are acknowledged and will be discussed
elsewhere.
Time
Time (School A and B) was an overriding feature in all facets of PES planning, including
time to plan lessons, prepare resources, mark work, and to get through syllabus content.
Significantly, integrated theory and practice is considered time consuming in terms of time
taken to teach and prepare. There was a significant emphasis on “teaching to the (ATAR)
test” in terms of the approach taken to planning, sequencing content and the nature of
assessment tasks. Propositional knowledge in the syllabus was taught in order of perceived
degree of difficulty, as related to the students, with the easiest content given least time and
taught early in the year and the hardest given most time and taught as close to the exam as
possible (School A and C).
The PES syllabus
The PES syllabus emerged as a major sticking point in the promotion of an integrated theory
and practice approach (School A, B and C). Reasons for this included, firstly, a major
emphasis placed by the School Curriculum and Standards Authority (SCSA, formerly the
Curriculum Council of WA) on testing the PES syllabus content. Teachers felt that despite
the rhetoric in the course Rationale, the syllabus does not require students to integrate theory
and practice (School A and B). Further, the syllabus does not provide specific guidance or
sign-posts to teachers towards the integration of theory and practice. Hence, schools often do
not approach it in that way (School A, B and C). Secondly, assessment types can be broadly
interpreted and adapted (e.g. School A where “investigations” are turned into tests). The
integration of theory and practice is not seen as a central feature of assessment and the
rationale is a part of the syllabus that is not read widely (School A and B). As a consequence,
teachers feel compromised and favour pragmatic considerations in their design of assessment.
19
The PES ATAR Examination
The PES ATAR exam was considered a “knowledge based” (School C) one , which requires
students to “hit the marks” (School A) by using key syllabus based terminology. Many
school assessments are overtly designed to reflect the fact that students will ultimately take
the PES ATAR exam (School A, B and C). Consequently, maximum weightings are offered
to “response” (Schools A, B and C all offered a maximum 50% weighting to “response”),
while aspects of investigation also reflect test like conditions (School A and B), variously
taking the form of in class essays to simulate the ATAR exam and “save time” (School A).
Discussion
Space precludes detailed analysis of the findings above with reference to the theoretical
frames used in this study, or in-depth discussion of data in relation to different
understandings of “integrated theory and practice” in PES in WA. The following discussion
points are necessarily selective and are intended specifically to support professional
engagement with issues pertinent to senior secondary physical education teaching in schools
throughout Australia and internationally.
The data highlights that broadly speaking, in Arnold’s terms, teachers see the “integration of
theory and practice”, in the following terms: theoretical knowledge (syllabus content) about
movement (practical) should be taught in and through practical activities and examples. This
recognises some possibilities presented by Arnold’s conceptualisation, but at the same time
overlooks other pedagogical possibilities and echoes Thorburn’s (2007) and Brown and
Penney’s (2013) call for further exploration of the application of Arnold’s work to thinking
about curriculum, pedagogy and assessment in senior secondary physical education.
Secondly, the data highlights that it is naïve to believe that the philosophical basis of a course
such as the PES in WA will take precedence over pragmatic and accountability features, such
as the ATAR exam and Syllabus adherence. Teachers’ pedagogy is no “island” and is clearly
impacted on by many influences. Teachers (often in response to administrators and parents)
in this study were quite openly and understandably seeking to reconcile classroom practice
with the needs of their students, in the context of the end game, namely the ATAR exam.
Conclusion
Locating the findings presented here within the broader study, we point to the need for
pedagogic practice to be seen in and amidst complex contexts of curriculum development,
negotiation and interpretation. In WA we have seen clear tensions emerge between the reform
intent, the PES syllabus, guidance and advice issued by various stakeholders, and the format
and content of the ATAR exam. The data presented reflects that currently, there is a lack of
clarity for teachers in relation to what the pedagogical intent of the new PES is, and further,
20
there are several factors seemingly inhibiting the development of “integration” as articulated
in the course rationale as a central facet of the new PES in WA.
References
Arnold, P. (1979). Meaning in movement, sport and physical education. London: Heinemann.
Arnold, P. (1988). Education, movement and the curriculum. London: Falmer.
Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Volume IV. Class, codes ad
control. London: Routledge..
Brown, T. D. (2008). Movement and meaning-making in physical education. ACHPER
Healthy Lifestyles Journal, 55(2/3), 1–5.
Brown, T. D. (2013). A vision lost? (Re)articulating an Arnoldian conception of education 'in'
movement in physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 18(1), 21-37.
Brown, T. D., & Penney, D. (2013). Learning 'in', 'through' and 'about' movement in senior physical
education? The new Victorian Certificate of Education Physical Education European
Physical Education Review, 19(1), 39-61.
Curriculum Council of Western Australia (2002). Our Youth, Our Future. Post-Compulsory
Education Review. Perth: Curriculum Council of Western Australia.
Curriculum Council of Western Australia (2009). Physical Education Studies. Perth:
Curriculum Council of Western Australia.
Hay, P., & Penney, D. (2009). Proposing conditions for assessment efficacy in physical education.
European Physical Education Review, 15(3), 389-405.
Jones, A. Penney, D. Newhouse, P. & Campbell, A. (2009). Digital assessment in high stakes
Physical Education practical examinations. In T. F. Cuddihy & E. Brymer (Eds.),
Creating Active Futures. Edited Proceedings of the 26th ACHPER International
Conference (pp.217-232). Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
Jones, A., & Penney, D. (2013). News from WA......(more than just iron ore and great footy
teams) – policy principles to course design. In J. Quay & A. Mooney (Eds.), A
defining time in Health and Physical Education: Proceedings of the 28th ACHPER
International Conference (pp. 64-73). Melbourne, November 27–29, 2013.
Macdonald, D., & Brooker, R. (1997). Assessment issues in a performance-based subject : A case
study of physical education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(1), 83-102.
MacPhail, A. (2004). The Social Construction of Higher Grade Physical Education: The
Impact on Teacher Curriculum Decision-making, Sport, Education and Society, 9(1),
53–73.
MacPhail, A. & Halbert, J. (2005). The Implementation of a revised Physical Education
syllabus in Ireland: Circumstances, rewards and costs. European Physical Education
Review, 11:287- 308:056769
21
Penney, D. (2013). From policy to pedagogy: prudence and precariousness; actors and
artefacts. Asia – Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 4(2), 189197
Penney, D. (2008). Playing a political game and playing for position. Policy and curriculum
development in health and physical education, European Physical Education Review,
14(1), 33_50.
Penney, D. (2013). Points of tension and possibility: boundaries in and of physical education. Sport,
Education and Society, 18(1), 6-20.
Penney, D. & Evans, J. (1999). Politics, Policy and Practice in Physical Education. London:
E & FN Spon.
Penney, D., & Hay, P. (2008). Inclusivity and senior physical education. Insights from Queensland
and Western Australia. Sport, Education and Society, 13(4), 431-452.
Penney, D. & Kirk, D. (1998). Changing thinking, changing practice in curriculum
development. Paper presented at the ICHPER Conference, London, 14–19 July.
Penney, D. & Mr. Walker (2007). Senior secondary schooling in Western Australia:
Transforming curriculum, lives and society? Curriculum Perspectives, 27(3), 22_35.
Penney, D., Jones, A., Newhouse, P., & Cambell, A. (2012). Developing a digital assessment in
senior secondary physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 17(4), 383410.
Thorburn, M. (2007). Achieving conceptual and curriculum coherence in high-stakes school
examinations in Physical Education, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 12(2),
163_184.
Thorburn, M. & Collins, D. (2003a). Integrated curriculum models and their effects on
teachers’ pedagogy practices, European Physical Education Review, 9(2), 185-209.
22